Sorry, I still disagree. The Amazon bid is just part of the overall trend of companies moving into Boston. Because we have limited space to build more offices, it would crowd out other moves. So it would be no where close to 100% additive, and likely only minimally additive at best.

The trend for moves into Boston will continue to put pressure on housing and infrastructure with or without Amazon. We need to deal with that trend by building more housing and reinvesting in our infrastructure, not by blocking company moves (although I do question incentives, unless they are a package of infrastructure stuff we should be doing anyway, like Blue Red Connector, Blue Line to Lynn, 1 A upgrades...).

Rising from Boston’s building boom, a new kind of startupBy Scott Kirsner GLOBE CORRESPONDENT FEBRUARY 09, 2018

Boston has been Crane City for the last five years or more: construction everywhere you look, and detour signs, too.

Much less noticeable has been a boom in startups focused on buildings. Entrepreneurs are looking at a massive industry and seeing opportunity — construction spending on private projects in the US hit a record high of $1.25 trillion in December, according to the Commerce Department. And while that enormous number includes everything from architectural design to laying bricks, it doesn’t include the cost of renting out the space or managing it once the work is complete. That equals even more opportunity for entrepreneurs.

The venture capital firm Borealis Ventures says it is tracking more than 70 companies in the Boston area that are focused on construction, real estate technology, and “smart cities,” a term for applying software and sensors to gather data from the urban environment.

“The most common challenges across the world — sea level rise, urbanization, the affordability of housing, and everything in between — we see it all in Boston,” says Jesse Devitte, managing director at Borealis, based in Boston and Hanover, NH. “Never before has our modern existence been under the pressure it is under today, with changes in the environment, and billions of people piling into cities. It creates a unique moment....”

Where are the NIMBYs on this? Hello? Silence. So, sportsball stadiums, shadows and digital signage, bad. A company that's not only miserable to work for, but also ready to come in and force the have-nots onto the streets, good? I don't know else to say, other than the mind of the Boston NIMBY is like a labyrinth. Do we truly want to be a smaller, shitter version of San Francisco?

If neighborhood activists speak out, then I'll stand with them. But if they stay silent, then I'll know that they're full-blown hypocrites.

Where are the NIMBYs on this? Hello? Silence. So, sportsball stadiums, shadows and digital signage, bad. A company that's not only miserable to work for, but also ready to come in and force the have-nots onto the streets, good? I don't know else to say, other than the mind of the Boston NIMBY is like a labyrinth. Do we truly want to be a smaller, shitter version of San Francisco?

If neighborhood activists speak out, then I'll stand with them. But if they stay silent, then I'll know that they're full-blown hypocrites.

They're not difficult to understand at all. They live and breath to get their names in the paper and get projects cancelled or reduced. Then with that affirmation the cycle begins again.

Since they have no actual morals or principles beyond headlines, put Amazon HQ in that context. What are they fighting against? Stopping Suffolk Downs from getting redeveloped? There's also no actual subsidies being shared publically yet, so no angle to play there. I'd also speculate aside from a few dead-enders who wish the city would go back to 1965 the public is overwhelmingly in favor of Amazon locating here (subject to state $$$ which again is undefined).

So, why did these idiots go balls to the wall against the Winthrop Square project, while not saying boo to 1 Dalton which is actually taller and presumably causes wind and shadow issues along with making city more crowded/unaffordable/blah blah blah. Because they thought the public would overwhelmingly side with them over the shadows on the common in January argument. In short, they went after the argument that they thought they'd get an easier win on, when if they had any principles they'd be against both equally.

The nice thing about it is that pretty much all the employees will be single and kidless... and won't be doing much other than working at Amazon. So they'll pay plenty of taxes while not needing much in the way of city services.